We have a number of regular guests on the talk show. When they're not talking, many of them are writing. This is where you'll find their stuff.

The views expressed by our guest bloggers do not necessarily reflect the views of sane, moral and/or reasonably intelligent people. Jesus may or may not be pleased (or even care). And what's more, they certainly don't reflect the views of Steve Brown (I'm not even sure he knows any of this is going on).

Blog DescriptionThe Guest Room

Our Schools Are Graveyards for Freedom

John W. Whitehead December 13th, 2007

“The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.”—Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

My granddaughter is seven months old. Intent on discovering as much as she can about the world around her, she is blissfully unaware of the fact that she is under constant surveillance. Between her doting parents, her equally doting grandparents and a baby monitor that is always turned on and tuned in, there is little this child can do that goes undetected.

When dealing with a precocious infant, such constant watchfulness is undeniably a good thing. However, I can’t help but wonder at what point and at what age such surveillance, especially outside the home, stops being beneficial and starts teaching young people that they have no right to privacy. When does concerned supervision become subtle indoctrination geared toward meek acceptance of a totalitarian society?

Modern technology now makes it possible for roaming digital eyes to watch every move students make. Using surveillance cameras, young people are under observation from the moment they step foot on a bus until they arrive home. In fact, schools both small and large are beginning to litter their hallways, classrooms and even buses with surveillance cameras.

For instance, schools in Demarest, N.J., have installed surveillance cameras with live feeds to police headquarters. Patrolling officers can access the feeds from headquarters and several laptops. And while the cameras are not equipped to pick up audio, the video capabilities are “impressive.” According to a local CBS reporter, “each of the laptops can pick up 16 different angles at one time, turning a single operator into a mobile surveillance team.”

Viewmont High School in Utah recently installed 36 cameras to provide school officials a bird’s eye view of every square inch of the school’s hallways and common areas. The cameras allow school officials to watch students as they go between classes, pass love notes in the hallways and gather in the school’s parking lot. “I can just simply scan through the school in less than a minute,” boasts the school’s principal.

Capitalizing on “a high-tech ground-breaking surveillance method,” schools in Little Rock, Ark., have installed 700 cameras in buildings throughout the school district. Like the Demarest camera system, these are linked in real-time to the local police department. The technology, valued at around half a million dollars, “allows us as police officers to be able to review a large portion of the building,” stated a Little Rock police officer.

Considering the rash of school shootings over the past decade, it’s understandable that school officials and parents would want to tighten security. Yet as schools across the country follow this heightened surveillance trend in lockstep, it remains unclear whether the benefits outweigh the drawbacks.

The majority of schools today have adopted an all-or-nothing lockdown mindset that leaves little room for freedom, individuality or due process. Metal detectors, drug-sniffing dogs and pat-down searches have become commonplace, while draconian zero tolerance policies characterize as criminal behavior the most innocuous things, such as students in possession of Alka-Seltzer or a drawing of a soldier.

A handful of schools have even gone so far as to require students to drape Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags around their necks, which allow school officials to track every single step students take. So small that they are barely detectable to the human eye, RFID tags produce a radio signal by which the wearer’s precise movements can be constantly monitored.

The prevailing thought seems to be that adopting such stringent measures will prevent students from committing crimes. However, security cameras certainly didn’t prevent Asa H. Coon from wreaking havoc in his Cleveland school. The troubled teen opened fire, shooting two students and two teachers before killing himself earlier this year—and that was with 26 security cameras placed throughout the school and an armed security guard on duty.

Furthermore, these measures dramatically interrupt the learning process, leave young people with a sense of unfair and disproportionate punishment, increase anxiety and promote feelings of distrust between students and administrators. They also habituate young people to state authority figures having access to their sensitive information and conducting arbitrary searches, with little regard for their right to privacy. As one reporter noted, surveillance systems serve to “normalize electronic surveillance at an early age, conditioning young people to accept privacy violations while creating a market for companies that develop and sell surveillance systems.”

This observation is in keeping with a U.S. Department of Justice report indicating that the percentage of students across the country who noticed surveillance cameras in their schools increased from 39% in 2001 to 58% in 2005. As the percentage increases, so too does the acceptance of what was once considered an unthinkable intrusion. As a Utah news station reported, “Some students say they live in an era where cameras are always recording so the idea is not a big deal.” In other words, America’s schools are making a police state look normal.

We all want to keep our kids safe and cut down on drugs, violence and other at-risk behaviors in the schools. However, our schools are fast becoming graveyards for freedom, and that should be cause for alarm. After all, whatever we teach our young people today about their freedoms—or lack thereof—will not only shape their understanding of the role that government plays in their lives, it will also determine the future of our republic.

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org. Information about The Rutherford Institute is available at www.rutherford.org.

Publication Guidelines / Reprint Permission
John W. Whitehead's weekly commentaries are available for publication to newspapers and web publications at no charge. Please contact marketing@rutherford.org to obtain reprint permission.

Print This Post | Email This Post | Digg This!

This entry was posted on Thursday, December 13th, 2007 at 2:32 pm and is filed under , , . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

14 Responses to “Our Schools Are Graveyards for Freedom”

Charles December 13th, 2007

The tension between liberty and security is not a new tension. It goes back to the beginning. When the pressure gets measurable, it seems they have an indirect relationship with one another….achieve a unit of liberty costing two units of security and vice versa…and we desparately desire a balance of both.

Rome is a great example. For hundreds of years, it seems that balance would last for about a minute then things would start collapsing again. In the end, security won out but when it did, people became apathetic and no one really wanted to save Roman culture anymore. I bet the same thing would have happened if liberty won out over security, except it would have been from terror, rather than banality.

I agree that such intrusions go against the spirit of our liberties. John is right about schools becoming graveyards of liberty, but these days, they sometimes are just plain graveyards…and the tension grows.

Mrs Zeke December 13th, 2007

We have an ugly history when we become afraid..

mis understandings meant you might be a witch
The Japanese - Americans were locked up
Different thought meant you were a communist
Be careful if you choose to spank in public

The thing is the fear only opens up the ability to create more fear, it is like something that grows.

*sigh* Schools will become a police state and later these babies will be the government we can only pray they do not do what they were taught,

Love now tomorrow is not promised to anyone

Zeke December 13th, 2007

We are headed full bore towards a surveillance society. The nanny state/paternal defender state will accept nothing less.

And it's all for our own good.

Christov December 14th, 2007

What's happened it the, in my opinion, pre-meditated erosion of the "reasonable expectation of privacy" to the end that total surveillance is accepted as "normal" and "just the way things are." Fortunately, there will always be hackers, conspiracy theorists, and others who figure things out and act to subvert authority, not out of a desire to destroy society, but because authority, as practiced by humans, is something that requires daily subversion to hold it in check.

MikeMcK December 14th, 2007

Just one more reason I'm glad we homeschool.

Sean from Michigan December 14th, 2007

Excellent article, no doubt. It incited me to think about two issues. First, I wonder about the need for such large public schools. Somehow, we have decided, as a society, that larger schools are less expensive, thus making them better, on the argument that they are more efficient. How would things change if we had smaller schools? This would certainly have an effect on class size and individual attention. There would be fewer cliques, teachers would know the students better and there could only be an improvement in teacher/child relationships. But money is our king in the USA. Change is not likely. We hear teachers say that it's all about the students, for example, then at the beginning of the next year, they go on strike for more money and more benefits.

Secondly, the argument has been made that as we degenerate into a more secular society, and as we teach kids to keep God out of their lives when in school, are we really that ignorant to think that we will NOT have more shootings and mass murderers? Without God, there will be an absence of God (clearly) and with an absence of God, there is a core problem, right down to our roots. The core problem, or "root cause", is that people tend to place themselves above all else, and even before this country's forefathers, we knew that this meant chaos. Chaos means their is a need for control and that control either comes in self-control, through the understanding of a higher being watching over us and monitoring us, or it means a camera, today. And behind that camera, there is an authority watching over us.

When I was a child, there certainly was someone watching over me at all times. That Being (my Triune God) is still there and will be there forever. I do not need a camera watching me. Besides, it can't love me like a police man can.

greg from canada December 15th, 2007

I agree with you Mike. Schools in Canada are getting bad too. Christian school or home schooling options are definately looking more attractive all the time

mikemck December 15th, 2007

Greg, we chose to homeschool primarily for three reasons.

The first is that we live so far out in the country, that almost four hours of the kids' day would be taken up just riding the bus.

That just seemed stupid to us.

The second reason is that we know from experience (I'm a former teacher and my mother, who has a home on our farm with her husband, is also a teacher) that government schools are really not educating our children to their fullest potential. Some of that is their fault because of union, outcome based education, etc, but a lot of it is because government schools are designed to cater to the lowest common denominator.

You have twenty-five kids in a classroom and twenty are performing at A-B level and the other five are performing at D-F level. The way the schools are set up now, the teacher can't go on with the A-B kids until the D-F kids are caught up or else he gets in trouble.

Back when I was a kid, my dad was an engineer, my grandmother was an English teacher, and my mother taught college level sociology.

So, when we kids would get home from school, they all made sure that our government school education was supplimented at home with their assignments.

Because they expected more of us and pushed us harder, my sister ended up graduating high school at sixteen and I would have, too, if I hadn't wanted to stay in for baseball and football.

Our kids are miles ahead of their government school contemporaries.

Melody and Jason both are taking college courses at a local community college and they're only 14 and 13, respectively.

Melody is 14 years old and she makes money tutoring the government school seniors and juniors after their classes. She's also started her own business making scented candles. She actually has distribution among about twenty stores. FOURTEEN YEARS OLD!

Plus, she's helped to draft two grant proposals to the NEA and is an intern at a local assisted living community.

Jason just came in second in a science competition a couple of weeks ago. He's thirteen years old and beat out a couple dozen government school kids from various government schools around the region.

I mentioned he was second. The kid who came in first was another homeschooler.

Jason's thirteen and he helps me run my business. He deals with vendors and distributors and retailers about as much as I do.

And the third reason we decided to homeschool is that government schools teach facts and principles, but don't teach how to apply those facts and principles in real life situations.

Again, I point you to Melody and Jason. They wouldn't have accomplished half of the things they've accomplished in government schools.

They wouldn't be learning Latin or rhetoric or philosophy or economics.

By the way, not sure if you're aware of this or not, but Tim Tebow was homeschooled.

Christov December 15th, 2007

A couple of weeks ago, I administered the Woodcock-Johnosn, Third Edition, Tests of Achievement (WJ-III) to my youngest brother's eldest sons (13 and 12). The kids are homeschooled, their mother is a university grad, and my brother teaches at a junior college, is working on his doctorate.

The boys' grade-level equivalents fell, for the most part, around 12 - 12.9. They each had a couple of areas in need of improvement, but they are way above, as Mike says, government school peers. The WJ-III is a normed set of tests, what that means in re grade level equivalents is that the test subject has done about as well on that subtest as the average person at that grade level would have done. It doesn't mean they've mastered every skill or knowledge area found in that grade level's curriculum.

Still, if you can afford it and one of the parents can tolerate being around the kids 24/7, I think homeschooling's the way to go. Waist-length hair and denim jumper for Mom is probably optional :)

Zeke December 15th, 2007

Mike, you must be one proud father. Your kids sound truly extraordinary. Well done.

greg from canada December 16th, 2007

Wow. Very impressive Mike. Your kids sound like very hard workers. You certainly made the right choice in homeschooling your children.

greg from canada December 21st, 2007

I have a couple questions about the homeschooling Mike.

In Canada the home schoolers belong to an organization where they get their teaching materials from and also go on field trips with other home school families. Does this work the same with how you did the home schooling? Im guessing that since you were in a remote area you may not have done the field trips with other homeschoolers.

Also, in high school where in chemistry or biology where you would do labs, are home schoolers able to do these activities as well? From the sounds of your post it sounds like your son is very good at science.

I look forward to seeing your response
Merry Christmas

mikemck December 21st, 2007

I have a couple questions about the homeschooling Mike.

In Canada the home schoolers belong to an organization where they get their teaching materials from and also go on field trips with other home school families. Does this work the same with how you did the home schooling? Im guessing that since you were in a remote area you may not have done the field trips with other homeschoolers. [/quote]

You have to understand that we didn't start out to homeschool them so we didn't really spend the time to investigate different groups like many homeschool families do.

It started out very slowly, with us just supplimenting their school work and one summer, we decided that since we all had a background in education that we could teach them ourselves and then, at the end of the summer one year, they just didn't go back.

It's really only been in the last three or four years that homeschoolers were seen as anything but religious whakos and survivalist rednecks.

Even today, if someone in our area says "homeschool", it's pretty safe to assume that they're talking about the Amish.

So we know that there are a lot of groups out there, but we've never really taken advantage of them.

[quote]Also, in high school where in chemistry or biology where you would do labs, are home schoolers able to do these activities as well?[/quote]

Absolutely. My mother and her husband have a home on our farm and help us with the childrens' schooling.

Her husband has a background in engineering and physics and they've done great things together.

I have a tendency in my enthusiasm to overdo things so the more he got into science as a boy, they more I tried to create a NASA size lab for him but that really wasn't necessary.

They have a pretty rudimentary lab, but have still been able to do all sorts of things with robotics, rocketry, some chemistry, etc.

[quote]From the sounds of your post it sounds like your son is very good at science.[/quote]

He is and I can't imagine where he got that from. I'm pretty good and mechanical things but I'd much rather talk theology or history.

But he's always been curious about the way things work and it just grew from there.

He used to watch those robot fighting shows that were all the rage a few years ago and he really got into building robots. Then, a couple of years ago, he saw a story on TV about soldiers coming back from Iraq missing arms and legs and he got interested in prostetics and how they work.

That was what his project was in the science fair I mentioned earlier.

He's also made a project dealing with robotics and voice recognition.

greg from canada December 21st, 2007

Its funny that you mention those fighting robots. I made one myself in highschool electronics class when they were first getting popular in the UK. Im in the electronics engineering field now.

Leave a Reply

Most Popular Stuff

Comments

thankful

I really loved that video,,What if that is our welcoming committee...

What do you think about my proposal?

John Ray

I guess the House of smite was lost on me. Someone bleeding to death from a papercut...

The House of Smite

Fran

I loved this blog–I loved the story, and I loved the charm and...

What do you think about my proposal?

shelly

Darrell Hammond plays/played Bill Clinton on SNL. He’s still part of the...

Etcetera - 10.08.08 - Putin

Tony Heringer

Good show guys and I for one am...

Who Are You & What Do You Want? - Ukleja & Lorber on SBE